By: Vitalio Angula

If one thing stood out at the various memorial services held in honour of the late Founding President of Namibia, Sam Nujoma, during February and March 2025, it was the members of Namibia’s Black Capitalist Elite assisting in preparations to give the Father of the Namibian Nation a dignified send-off.

Amongst these prominent Namibians were David Nuyoma, the Founding Chief Executive Officer of the Development Bank of Namibia; Simon Andjamba, a prominent beneficiary of government contracts; and Tona Amadhila, husband to Namibia’s Speaker of the National Assembly and Former Finance Minister, Sarah Kuugongelwa-Amadhila.

At first glance, this does not appear awkward, but deeper introspection raises the question of how Sam Nujoma managed to unlock capital for a few and how government spending can be used as a tool for capital formation.

For over three decades, Namibia’s vocabulary has been dominated by the concept of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) as the sine qua non of national development.

Every major policy announcement, like the formation of the Namibia Investment Promotion and Development Board (NIPDB), State of the Nation Address, and investment summits invoke FDI as the engine of job creation and growth.

Foreign capital is courted as the lifeblood of development, but maybe now is the time to ask ourselves an uncomfortable but necessary question:

What would Namibia look like if we re-imagined it through the lens of Local Direct Investment?

“LDIrefers to domestic capital invested by local individuals, institutions, or companies into productive assets within their own country”.

In simple terms, it is when Namibians invest in Namibia to build businesses, industries, infrastructure or productive enterprises.

LDI is the domestic counterpart of FDI

A good example of LDI can be found in the Aawambo men from northern Namibia who were recruited through the contract labour system to work in mines, railways, commercial farms and ports.

The wages they earned in central and southern Namibia were sent back home as remittances and reinvested into building brick houses, buying cattle and establishing cuca-shops.

These migrant workers also invested in tractors, taxis and long-distance transport businesses like mini-buses.

Many of them also invested in businesses like hardware stores, service stations and auto-mechanic garages.

The migrant labour remittance economy shows that Namibians have always generated capital internally- even under repression.

The question today is whether the spirit of Local Direct Investment can be scaled up, institutionalised, supported by policy and connected to modern sectors like manufacturing, agro-processing, solar energy and telecommunications.

Not Anyone’s Fault

At independence, most black Namibians had no land, no inherited capital and only had limited access to credit.

As a result, early capital accumulation flowed through political networks, party structures, kinship ties and liberation movement elites, as one can witness at the memorial of the Founding President Sam Nujoma.

Political proximity translated into economic opportunity and access to state tenders determined who accumulated capital.

The question then presents itself: can Namibia move away from International Monetary Fund (IMF) influenced macro-economic frameworks, such as FDI and re-imagine Namibia through the lens of LDI?

The answer is yes because Namibia is not necessarily capital-poor but rather capital-constrained.

The GIPF, which David Nujoma ran as CEO after his stint at the DBN, manages billions in assets, N$ 183 BILLION as of early 2025.

The Social Security Commission holds significant reserves, and private pension and insurance funds collectively control large pools of capital.

According to the Bank of Namibia quarterly report, “Namibian banks are highly liquid, well-capitalised and resilient with total assets in the banking sector hitting N$184.7 billion by quarter three of 2025”.

So, the issue is not the absence of capital but rather the deployment of capital.

The future of Namibia will not be secured by how much foreign capital we attract but by how effectively we mobilise our own.

With so much capital in the country, why do Namibian leaders still pursue FDI as a “primary” tool for development?

The late Hage Geingob held a strong pro-investment stance on FDI, even establishing the NIPDB under his Presidency with a mandate to attract foreign investment, which has not borne the promised fruit to date.

The Late President also focused on extractive sectors as crucial to national development, job creation and economic growth.

However, Namibia still has a high unemployment rate, which is not likely to change if the country continues on the same path.

FDI should complement- not substitute domestic capital formation.

Post-independence Namibia, politically connected Namibians gained stakes in mining, fishing quotas, construction tenders and government procurement.

Fishing quotas in particular became a major capital gateway!

The state allocated rights and access rights that became monetised assets for the black capitalist elite.

So, the question becomes, if Sam Nujoma could unlock capital for a few, can the Namibian state unlock capital locally in order to drive the country’s development agenda?

Local Direct Investment offers a path to sustainable growth, broad-based ownership, and long-term economic sovereignty.

FDI can build projects!

LDI can build a nation!

• Vitalio Angula is a socio-political commentator and independent columnist